As a dedicated practitioner of the pedagogical arts I thought I should check this out to see if I could glean any tips to enhance my work. Well, first I think it’s safe to say one should never put one’s inner-city war-zone school into an experiment with a crazy eyed Stacy Keach who is determined to use reprogrammed military hard-ware as a solution to the campiest gangs since The Warriors. Also appointing Malcolm McDowall as Principal is probably a bad idea. And when one of the teachers is Pam Grier (pre-Tarantino) you’ve got to realise things will go South pretty quickly.

This B-Movie feels like someone locked the Blackboard Jungle in a room with The Terminator and supplied some Barry White CDs and Viagra. And while it’s not without its fun it suffers from a poorly conceived world in which parts of America have become “Free-Fire” zones where the police won’t go but where the Government is still funding public education. Like many future shock films it fails to answer important questions such as: where do they get all the hair gel from? How can these losers afford so many bullets? And why would McDowall’s Principal allow his peppy daughter to attend such a hell hole?

So, not great then. But fun can be had, particularly in the last 20 minutes where the budget is thoroughly used up on some dodgy pyrotechnics and stop motion work. Was enough of a cult hit to get a DTV sequel.

What was the Canadian government smoking in the late 1970s/early 1980s? Whatever is was we have their liberal ideas on film financing for the career of the great David Cronenberg, king of body-horror and overall a damn fine film-maker (watch A History of Violence if you don’t believe me, and if you do believe me watch it anyway!) Scanners is very much part of his early work, though less sexual than Rabid of The Brood. It has much of the roughness of his early films (partly due to budget and a short production time), but the ideas shine through, and this is what makes so much of Cronenberg’s films worth a look. He has great ideas. In this a thalidomide like drug has been tested on pregnant mothers, giving their children psychic powers which, in one bravura sequence, can lead to people’s heads exploding.

Not all the acting is great, but the effects work well and the pace of the film never lets up. Striding the film like a colossus is the great Michael Ironside as the bad-guy Darryl Revok – some serious acting happens whenever he’s on screen, and the film does sag a little without him. Patrick McGoohan turns up (sporting an excellent beard) to offer some sinister support. A late night treat.

Bad films are fascinating. Not for what they are, more for what they could have been. Take Supernova (or rather, don’t). It started life as a low budget sci-fi horror, a Hellraiser in space, written by William Malone (who has previous on this blog, the Alien rip-off Titan Find). Then it fell into the hands of United Artists who liked it so much they bought it and completely re-wrote it (at least 5 writers appear to have worked on the film). It was developed with one director, Jeffrey Wright, who then jumped ship at the last minute with Walter Hill coming in. Sets were re-designed, scripts were re-issued. Hill delivered an unfinished cut (missing a lot of effects) which preview audiences hated. Another director was brought in. More script changes, a new cut. Audiences still hated it. Francis Ford-Coppola (of all people) was brought in to re-edit. It was still a steaming pile. As Alan Smithee was busy, Thomas Lee was invented. A quick release, no critics’ previews, and a low budget idea that would have cost about $5 million winds up costing between $60-90 million, and taking around $14 million at the box-office. It’s a classic tale of an interesting idea (which sounds a lot like Event Horizon) becoming a huge bloated mess.

The film itself has an excellent cast (James Spader, Angela Basset, Robert Forster and, eh, Lou Diamond Phillips) and some decent effects but it fundamentally fails to cohere and feels like there are bits missing. Scenes jar together and characters lack clear development: a case in point being Spader’s Pilot’s previous drugs problem which is mentioned but never bears on the script. Attempts are made to create tensions between characters, but they fail due to the thinness of the plot and the choppiness of the editing. The bad-guy is poor (apparently his evil transformation is cut down from the original edit), and comes over as a cheap version of the T1000. A fascinating mess, but a mess, and sadly not even bad enough to be funny. However a lesson can be learnt. If you like an idea, make the idea, don’t change it so much it becomes something else. This is a film that proves the danger of committee led film making. By trying to change a story to please everyone, you please no-one.

After impressing with his low budget debut, the subtle and smart Monsters (2010), director Gareth Edwards takes on the daunting task of rebooting Godzilla for an American audience. Daunting because Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich managed to make a terrible hash of it in 1998. If anything the rampant stupidity of the previous effort to Westernise such a Japanese story influences Edwards too much. He’s made a film that impresses visually but after a strong opening, in which the monster’s origins are smartly retold, the film loses its way; it lacks a sense of fun, and is filled with characters displaying all the depth of cardboard. It’s a film that’s so desperate to be serious, it forgets to bring the fun. It is after-all a film about a really big lizard that has radioactive breath.

The lack of depth to the film is a surprise in that Monster’s strength was its characterisation. In this film the main character, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, is nothing more than a shallow lunk-head, constantly volunteering for dangerous missions despite the danger presented to his wife and child (who are equally shallow). The creature designs are excellent, but even the big monster face-off, when it comes, lacks logic, and ends up resembling a WWF match, in which the winner is obvious to everybody from the off. Ken Wanatabe, as a token Japanese character, is employed solely for his ability to be portentous, including a ham-fisted reference to Hiroshima.

In some senses I applaud the attempt to take the concept seriously. The original 1954 film is born on the very real fears of nuclear annihilation in post war Japan. This film lacks that focus, relocating to San Francisco, and de-contextualizing the fears that underpin the franchise. And as for fun, watch some of the 1980s movies: timetravel, aliens, mechnanical Godzillas. Maybe next time we could have a bit more character and a bit more fun.

Turns out blockbusters can still be good. Normally I eschew discussing the latest releases on this site, after all so many people have it covered. But Dawn was such a refreshingly well made film that it’s worth flagging it here and encouraging all and sundry to see it. Taking place several years after Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Dawn takes place just outside, a beautifully ruined, San Francisco, where ape society has developed into a beautiful collective ruled by Ceaser (once again performed/acted by Andy Serkis, who fully justifies his top billing) the main ape from Rise. Having constructed their own wooden village they are slowly developing into a socialist collective that lives in harmony with nature. Guess who’s going to screw it up?

Despite the intelligently monikered Simian Flu having wiped out most of humanity a few who are immune have banded together in SF living, with a believable inevitability, in the shopping centre base of a tower block. Whereas Ape-Kind is building something new, humankind are desperate to return to the world they lost; it’s the quest for restarting a hydro-electric plant that causes all the trouble.

The human characters are stock types, but well played. However the film belongs to the apes, with Tony Kebbell (as Koba) running Serkis close. The sfx are amazing, particularly on Orangutan Maurice (Karin Konoval) who convinces from his eyes to the tip of every millimeter of fur.

It’s not the smartest film ever made, but it’s not dumb. The only let down being the OTT finale that has now become compulsory in any big budget studio picture. An effective, well made movie. More of these please, Hollywood.

What is it with kids in horror? I was re-watching Orphan the other day (which is a bit silly but good fun) and my mind got to thinking about all the horror movies that use kids, or the idea of kids as a motif for horror. The furthest back I can go is Village of the Damned (1960), based on John Wyndham’s Midwich Cuckoos. In it, and it’s rather good, a village experiences a collective black out. Two months later all the women are pregnant, giving birth to advanced, telepathic, super-intelligent kids with malicious intent. Later movies prey on our fears both of and for our kids; Rosemary’s Baby plays excellently on anxieties about birth (after all you never really know what will come out…); The Omen suggests rampant evil; Don’t Look Now allows the child figure to be both one of mourning and haunting; The Shining threatens kids and shows them as threatening. The list could go on but it asks a question of the audience – why are children being used as sites for such terror. After all aren’t they all innocent? Maybe – but children, particularly in their pre-linguistic state, are little id monsters, desire unrestrained. Part of growing up is the development of a conscience. Somewhere we’ve developed a neurotic fear about the potential of unregulated childhood – somewhere they became the enemy. Perhaps it’s linked to the manichean view of childhood held in the press, in which they’re little angels to be defended from abusers (who lurk everywhere apparently), or demon children terrorizing grannies. Or perhaps children are just scary because of their potential – what we might make them. Films displace this into external forces, but deep down we know we make the monsters.

Oh the multitude inequities of film. Along comes a good adaptation of 2000AD’s Judge Dredd and no-one goes. I mean, ok that does include me, but y’know I rented it so I think I still have some moral high ground. And you could join me here, up in the rarefied atmosphere of knowing you supported a film that deserved your hard earned pennies by buying/renting/downloading it. It’s great in a nice scuzzy violent sort of a way. It takes a very simple premise, Dredd and newbie Judge Anderson get locked in a towering ghetto where the head baddie, Ma-Ma, instructs that they be killed. Ok, so far so The Raid. But it’s a very different movie, creating a convincing evocation of a dystopian society (filmed in Johannesburg) in which all sort of ludicrous ultra-violence takes place, enhanced by the use of a drug-induced POV which slows everything down for the user and us.

Striding this like a colossus is Karl Urban who should surely win a best actor award for actor who is only allowed to emote with his chin. Five minutes is enough for Stallone’s camp extravaganza to be forgotten. With this and his spot-on portrayal of Dr McCoy on Star Trek he’s fast becoming a favorite of mine. Please someone give this a sequel, rather than blowing another $200 million on another Transformers or GI Joe.

For lovers of proper 18 rated action – this may be the closest we get to a proper OTT Hollywood Verhoeven movie for the foreseeable future.

Somewhere there’s a double feature playing of 12 Monkeys and Looper. In an enjoyable iteration of the theme of inevitability that occurs in both films, so too the double feature would show Bruce Willis struggling with his own destiny twice. That both films cover such similar ground in such different ways, and that Willis is so different in each is testament to the vision of the directors Gilliam and Johnson. Johnson made a big splash with the excellent indie Brick, transposing the world of Chandler and Hammett to a US High School. His secret weapon was Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who is now fast proving himself to be one of Hollywood’s most dependable new stars. He appears in Looper as well, playing Willis’ younger self, an assassin who kills marks sent back from the future. He’s well paid for this, but his lavish lifestyle comes at a price – one day he’ll have to retire himself. Enter Willis.

Like Brick, Looper is told with a wonderful economy and pace and no little style. The future of Looper is believable; different enough but one we can recognize from our current situation (one poor special effect aside). Gordon-Levitt and Willis, who are by no means physical doubles, play off each other well; the older shouldering dangerous knowledge of a world yet to come, the younger unable to see past tomorrow. Complimenting them is Emily Blunt and Jeff Daniels, turning in nicely tuned performances. But the film belongs to Gordon-Levitt. 3rd Rock from the Sun feels like a long time ago.

What happens if you cross Mad Max with Working Girl? Cherry 2000 that’s what. My quest to watch as many futuristic dystopia movies continues with this slice of 80s camp. In the future a quite sad bloke lives with a sex robot, the titular Cherry 2000. While engaging in soapy sex she malfunctions and the only place to get a replacement chassis is Zone 7, one of those lawless desert areas that still manages to provide its inhabitants with food, electricity, clean water and hair-dye. Why do dystopias always have hair-dye?I mean, seriously, where do people in the future get their hair-dye? Anyway said sad bloke hires Melanie Griffith (she’s a rough, tough, bounty hunter!) to take him into the remains of Las Vegas so he can continue to get his rocks off with his plastic girlfriend. Is it just me or was Griffith’s box-office appeal one of the more mysterious elements of 80s Hollywood. It’s not her acting, and she’s pretty, but that voice! It may have worked in Working Girl (which is an insulting and patronizing piece of 80s fluff), but as a bounty hunter she’s just a bit too squeaky. After a sequence of illogical chases and action beats sad bloke realizes that flesh beats plastic and dumps Cherry for Mel. As a depiction of the future it lacks bite but I did enjoy one sequence in a night club where couples use lawyers to supervise a contract dictating their sexual congress for the evening. And the bad guys show promise; they seem to be a murderous self-help group with their boss spouting spurious slogans such as “Be true to yourself” when sending henchmen out to kill. Still it’s always good to see the late, greats, Harry Carey Jr & Ben Johnson, even if they’re wasted as they are here.

I think it’s best that I level with you. This film is terrible. I mean really shocking. It’s edited very badly, performances range from the wildly overacted to the so underplayed you can hardly tell the character exists. The plot makes some sense in the end but proceeds in such a ludicrous manner than it feels like an afterthought. In short I was thoroughly entertained.

In a distant sci-fi fantasy world there is a man called the Master. He’s mystical (you can tell because his voice is deep and booming and his face is obscured by a special effect). He likes to play crappy sci-fi chess with a crone (who has a voice-over at the beginning but disappears after the first scene). Anyway a ship has gone missing and the Master wants some people to go and investigate. To do this he chooses the biggest bunch of idiots from across the galaxy, puts them on a ship piloted by a nervous wreck, and fails to tell them what it’s all about. After some dodgy model work (by James Cameron no less!) they arrive at the planet to investigate. Low and behold they are slowly picked off one by one. But wait – what’s attacking them is their own id! This is surely what justifies the stupefying moment when a woman is raped to death by a giant worm. Really. Apparently Roger Corman, the producer, promised some nudity in the film. And that’s what they came up with. Anyway other than this poor woman being bounced upon by a giant, and rather sticky, piece of latex a variety of bizarre deaths ensue until only one crew member is left. Turns out it’s all a big cosmic game so the Master can choose his successor. It then ends. However if you want to watch a movie where Joanie from Happy Days has her face crushed to bits and Robert Englund looks bizarrely like Kenny Everett then this is for you. There are however some nice mattes. I like mattes. And look at the poster – it’s awesome. Nothing like the film, but awesome none the less.